Stability Is Overvalued

As a theoretical concept, stability is a great idea and that's why State has always sought to maintain stability. It makes their job as diplomats easier when you're always dealing with the same people, same issues, and expect consistent responses.

In reality, stability can be a good thing, a bad thing, or both.

Stability sucks when you're living under a corrupt and decadent regime that pilfers every last dime made and doesn't care one whit about the people. In other words, billions live in a situation that stinks because it's convenient for the world's diplomats to deal with the situation in the Middle East and Americans continue to be threatened because that vaunted stability perpetuates the funding of terror.

Stability is good for the leader of that country since he's (and it's almost always a he in the Arab/Muslim world) not worried about anything other than collecting his next endowment from the UN food for oil program or stashing away billions for personal excesses.

As a matter of US foreign policy, stability is a good thing when the nations involved are decent regimes, not sponsoring terrorism, democratically elected on a consistent basis, and have similar outlooks over human rights and international norms and conventions.

Stability in US foreign policy stinks when it purposefully overlooks regimes funding terrorism or casting a blind eye to the terrorists working covertly, overtly, or condoned by the governments with whom the US does business. That was the case with US foreign policy towards the Middle East. It overlooked the problems with terrorist funding in Saudi Arabia, Yemen, Egypt, Syria, Iraq, Iran, and other nations around the world for years. Hundreds of Americans died at the hands of these terrorists and the US looked the other way since the stability that the US sought was meant to protect a steady supply of oil from the region that feeds the global economy.

Yet, that stability has done nothing to strengthen US national security or secure the flow of oil. These nations can continue to alter the flow of oil and use the proceeds from the sale of oil to fund terrorist groups, including al Qaeda, Hizbullah, and others.

Creating instability among the regional players may increase US national security in a way that stability never could, since it may lead to new solutions to old problems, including the Palestinian Israeli conflict. Without the oil players being able to play their games, without the Palestinians unable to obtain the funding they need to launch their terrorist attacks, their ability to kill Israelis is lessened and the Israelis are that much closer to winning the war in a decisive manner. Instead of imposing a peace that will not give the Israelis the security they need, the Israelis may actually win a peace that will secure their existence for years to come because the Palestinian leadership will have no other choice but to accept it.

Go To Page: 1